Devils Lake inter-ocean. (Devils Lake, Ramsey Co., Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1905, 1887-04-30
TO Mr.. SPARKS.

A decision has just been rendered by
the supreme court of the United States
in the Maxwell land grant matter which
is of great importance to lower tribun.
ais and should be thoroughly dlgested
by Mr.. Sparks. While it afirms en-
phatically the right and jurisdiction of
a court to investigate and grant relief
where the issue of q patent has been
based upon fraud or mistake, it draws
the attention of the courts to the fact
that the patent is the highest evidence
Of title as we'll against the United States
as against a private individual.
In regard to the effect of this decision
upon the general land Office, a law clerk
in the attorney generals Office whose
duty it is to write decisions for the sig
nature Of the secretary Of the interior
and to recommend suits for the annul-
msnt Of patents, has this to say:
1t will not greatly change course
of procedure here, for this Office has at
all times been exceedingly careful in its
recommendations for suits of this char.
acter. Patents cannot be attacked upon
trivial charges or mere reports by special
agents, and we require the afidavits Of
ut least two reputable witnesses to the
charge of fraud before We will recon-
mend suit to set aside a patent. 1t is
true that the general land Office holds
that any technical violation Of law con.
stitutes fraud, and insists that the trans
fer Of the land on the day Of proving up
shall invalidate title, and If discovered
afterward is ample testimony upon
which to base suit to set aside q patent.
This Office does not agree to that, how.
eyer, and on no such evidence would
it recomend such a suit. This is one
reason why suits to set aside patents
held by lumber and iron companies
charged with acquiring land through
the settlement of individuals cannot be
successfully maintained. We are gov
erned here entirely by rulings Of the SUI
preme court, and the case of Myers W.
Croft, in which the court held that the
transfer of land upon the very day Of
final proof, if tho t~ransferee proved up
with clean hands, must convey q title
which can never be attacked, has been
the basis Of our action. The decisions
in the Maxwell case will do much to
enhance the ~sacredness Of the patent
and discourage petty attacks upon titles
which may be open to some technical
objection. It also, as q consequence, in
creases the importance of the final re-
ceipt q . basis Of title.
Here the theory Of Mr.. Sparks in re-
gard to "fraud" is entirely uprooted.
Patents cannot be attacked upon triv-
ial charges or mere reports Of special
agents. says this legal representative Of
the government. "We require the afi.
davits of at least two reputable witnesses
before We will recommend suit to sci
aside . patent "a very neat way Of say.
ing that the special agents who + EN-.
ployed for political reasons bv an officer
who is looking for political honors are
not reputable persons. The supreme
court is not Z political body /; the men
who pass upon the titles to land should
not DO influenced BY political motiv q
or political ambitions.
Sparks went into Office under an I'd.
ministration which acquired power by
virtus of the cry. " Reform i necessary"
This dsspondsntw vail was politically con.
~ e-TE~-s NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.